Knowing Your Rights: Excessive Force and Section 1983

"Section 1983" (42 U.S.C. § 1983) is the primary federal statute that allows citizens to sue government officials for violating their constitutional rights. While it covers many rights, one of the most litigated areas is excessive force by law enforcement.

The "Objective Reasonableness" Standard

The Supreme Court established in Graham v. Connor that police force must be judged by an "objective reasonableness" standard. The question isn't whether the officer had bad intent; the question is whether a reasonable officer on the scene would have used the same level of force.

Factors courts look at include:

• The severity of the crime at issue.
• Whether the suspect poses an immediate threat to the safety of the officers or others.
• Whether the suspect is actively resisting arrest or attempting to evade arrest by flight.

Qualified Immunity: The Biggest Hurdle

Even if rights were violated, officers are often protected by Qualified Immunity. This doctrine shields officials from liability unless their conduct violated "clearly established" statutory or constitutional rights.

To win a Section 1983 case, we must prove:

1. The officer's conduct was a violation of the 4th Amendment.
2. The right was "clearly established" at the time—meaning a prior court case had already ruled similar conduct illegal.

This is a high bar, which is why you need a specialist. Addison Law focuses on fighting Qualified Immunity defenses in the 10th Circuit. We believe that no one is above the law, especially those sworn to uphold it.